Ahmadenijad Opponents Slam His Foreign Policy Stance
I would say that this counts as a more conciliatory posture from our side starting to bear fruit:
With campaigns for the June 12 presidential election in full swing, none of the three challengers have shied away from publicly criticizing Ahmadinejad on topics long considered off-limits for debate in Iran, such as his stance on the country’s nuclear program and his vitriol for Israel. Reformist challenger Mir-Hossein Mousavi accused the president of so sullying the nation that Iranian passports are now on par with those of Somalia, the African state that has become a hub of poverty, piracy and terrorism. [...]
Mehdi Karroubi, another liberal challenger, took on the president’s handling of the nuclear program, which Iran says is aimed at civilian energy production but the West believes is meant to eventually produce weapons. Karroubi said Tehran needed to be more transparent and rational in pursuing its goals abroad.
This is one of the virtues of expressing a clear desire for an improved relationship with Iran. Doing so lowers the temperature over there and opens up political space for disagreement about foreign policy objectives. It also clarifies that there’s a real upside to responsible behavior, and a real downside to pushing the envelope on nuclear issues.
15 Responses to “Ahmadenijad Opponents Slam His Foreign Policy Stance”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
May 31st, 2009 at 1:28 pm
As an Iranian-American, I have to say, Mousavi is saying a lot of the right things, and in spite of my cynicism and the knowledge that he can’t really do anything to change the system, I really hope he wins, for symbolism if nothing else. But if the recent spate of bombings in Iran have been an indication, there’s no way the hardcore conservatives will give up power (btw it’ll be interesting to see how many votes Mohsin Rezai, who is nominally the most hardcore conservative/Islamist in the running, will get. My guess: less than 100 thousand).
May 31st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
If we really want Ahmadenijad out of power,what we should do is try to find ways to lower the world wide price of oil.That is what is keeping him in power.And while I do agree that MR Obama seems to be handleing Ahmadenijad better than MR Bush . I think that the Iranian elections will be decided by the state of their economy.
I thought it was interesting that when Mr Yglesias had a post yesterday on oil ,he did not mention the effect on foreign policy.High oil prices weaken us and strengthen our enemies . Most people on this blog are liberal.Some are conservative.I do not think that any of us want Ahmadenijad to stay in power.
MR Obama might even get support for a raise in the gas tax from some conservatives, for this reason.Believe it or not there are some conservatives who have publicly called for a higher gas tax . They feel that oil is our achilles heel.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Is there a chance that Ahmadenijad could lose? Or are the liberal candidates going to split the liberal vote?
Is Nate Silver over there doing polling and analyzing data?
Old Nate. I am surprised the Red Sox haven’t hired that guy.
May 31st, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Is there a chance that Ahmadenijad could lose? Or are the liberal candidates going to split the liberal vote?
As of right now, it looks slim. I think the vast majority of the reformist vote will go to Mousavi, because while Karroubi is probably the more outspoken of the two reformists, he also has a more mixed reputation, while both Mousavi and his wife are widely admired. Plus, the kind of people who are serious about their vote know they need to unite to elect Mousavi, and there aren’t too many of the “Mousavi is just like Ahmadinejad, let’s vote for Karroubi!” types in the Iranian political context.
May 31st, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Even if Ahmadenijad wins at least the liberals put a scare into him.
Matt’s right. We need to “lower the temperature” and “open up political space for disagreements.” Not just in Iran, but all over.
The era of nation-state saber rattling must come to an end soon. The world has become too complex, one spark anywhere could easily ignite world conflagration.
Our planet is running out of time. We need to get serious as a species.
May 31st, 2009 at 3:44 pm
PERSIAN
Thank you for your comments. When we are discussing a foriegn country ,it is always great to hear from someone who has actually been there.
I do hope that you are wrong about Ahmadenijad winning.But I am sure that you hope that you are wrong about that as well.
May 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
PERSIAN
Thank you for your comments. When we are discussing a foriegn country ,it is always great to hear from someone who has actually been there.
Thanks Pete. I like your point about the price of oil too, although Ahmadinejad’s economic policies have mostly been failures, the one thing between Iran and total economic ruin is the relatively high cost of oil (and that he convinced Iran’s parliament to base budgetary estimates on the current price of oil, rather than a ridiculously low conservative estimate of the price per barrel, which was the old way of doing things so the surplus could be pocketed by unaccountable elements).
At the same time, I don’t know if I want to see countries like Iran or even the Gulf states become poor, because the last thing we need is more unemployed young men in those countries…
May 31st, 2009 at 4:55 pm
I hope it’s not true, as has been reported, that American agents within Iran are engaged in acts of destruction there. If it is, that’s an odd way for the US to seek to improve relations.
But if it is true, it shows a certain largeness of spirit on the part of some leading Iranian politicians that they credit Obama’s words.
May 31st, 2009 at 5:36 pm
At least with respect to Iran, who is at least rational. North Korea is another matter.
May 31st, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I don’t know, Matt. I’d like to think that Iranians are smart enough to get sick of this moron of their own accord.
May 31st, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Did anyone else notice that the US is finally going to put the Mujahadeen al Khalq on the list of terrorist organizations?
About freaking time.
May 31st, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Well, until we stop hearing from Obama and the Congress crap about more aggressive sanctions and preventing Iran from getting refined petroleum products, there’s still nothing yet to indicate the US has any intention of being “conciliatory” to Iran.
This business of waiting until the Iran elections are over to start negotiating was nonsense from the start, since final decisions will be made by Khamenei anyway.
May 31st, 2009 at 9:26 pm
If we really want Ahmadenijad out of power,what we should do is try to find ways to lower the world wide price of oil.That is what is keeping him in power.
How does that work? Is the price of oil supposed to go down if someone else is President? Does Ahmadinejad have personal control over oil revenues?
May 31st, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Regarding comment #13 by squeakyRat
The Iranian economy is almost entirely supported by oil revenue.If the world wide price of oil goes below $ 50 a barrel ,it hurts the Iranian economy. This hurts Ahmadenijad in the election.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:11 am
[...] Yglesias sees this development as an indicator that President Obama’s willingness to engage Iran has been successful in [...]